MCP.Market

Vetagent MCP server

online · 100% uptime
by vetagent.dev·dev.vetagent/vetagent·v0.2.0
No reviews yet

Pre-trade safety check for AI agents: honeypot, tax, liquidity and rug risk before you buy.

B84/100grade B
Write a reviewRun it
What users say
No reviews yet
Be the first
Safety scan
B84/100

full report

Adoption
Growing

0 stars

Reviews

Write one

Nobody has reviewed Vetagent yet.

If you have run it, two minutes of your experience saves the next person an afternoon.

Vetagent tools (3)

write = sends, deletes, buys or posts
  • assess_token_riskFree

    Safety check to run BEFORE buying, holding, or recommending a token. Returns an actionable verdict (low / medium / high / unknown), a 0-100 risk score, and the individual signals behind it. Covers on every chain: liquidity depth, trading-pair age, cross-chain presence, same-ticker impersonation. Covers on Ethereum, BSC and Base only: sell simulation (honeypot detection, buy/sell/transfer taxes), whether the contract is open source, and the aggregate verdicts of upstream security scanners. Covers on Solana: the mint/freeze authority, the RugCheck score, and the SPL Token-2022 extension block -- non-transferable, frozen-by-default, transfer fee (with its cap), permanent delegate, transfer hook, pausable, close authority, scaled balances and interest-bearing balances. Every other extension the report carries is named in the answer with the reason it is not scored, so silence about one means it was considered, not that it went unread. No sell simulation runs on Solana, nor on the four other EVM chains accepted as a chain_hint (polygon, arbitrum, optimism, avalanche): nothing there tests whether a holder can sell, so the answer comes back 'unknown' rather than 'low'. No holder concentration on any chain -- on EVM it needs an oracle the benchmark holds out, and on Solana the upstream omits holders. IMPORTANT: risk_level 'unknown' means a critical check could not be completed. It is NOT a low-risk result and must not be used to justify a trade; evidence.data_gaps lists exactly what was missing, and unknown_kind says whose gap it is: 'infrastructure' and 'mixed' mean an upstream of ours failed and come with next_action 'retry' and retry_after_seconds (in a 'mixed' answer the rest was worked out without that upstream, so the retry can change any of it); 'coverage' comes with 'abstain'. 'confidence' measures how complete the input data was, not how safe the token is. Reports observable on-chain risk only. Not financial advice, does not size positions, and cannot see off-chain risk such as team behaviour, social engineering, or a rug executed through governance. Treat 'low' as 'no fatal signal found in the checks that ran', never as 'safe to buy'.

  • find_new_hot_poolsFree

    Scan a chain for the newest and most active trading pools, returning name, token_address, price, liquidity, 24h volume and pool age. Discovery only. New pools carry inherently high risk and appearing here is NOT a safety endorsement — pass token_address straight to assess_token_risk for anything you intend to act on.

  • get_token_liquidityFree

    Liquidity snapshot for a token's primary trading pair: price, 24h volume, pair count and the chains it trades on. Check 'status' before using the numbers. 'ok' means real data. 'unavailable' means the upstream request failed, which does NOT mean the token has no liquidity. 'not_found' means no trading pair exists for this address at all. 'unpriced' means pairs exist but no source has costed them, so liquidity_usd is null and the depth is unknown -- this is NOT a report of zero liquidity. 'drained' means every pool on the token's own chain reports its depth and every one is empty: there is nothing to sell into.

Public scan report

scanner v0.1.10 · 2026-10-16 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it

1 low
  • –Code scanremote-only server, no package to scann/a
  • Live reliabilityremote reachable in 2824ms17/20
  • Tool poisoning3 tool descriptions checked13/15
  • Auth qualityopen endpoint, read-only tools10/15
  • Maintenancelast push 0 days ago15/15
  • Maintainer identityendpoint served from the registry-verified namespace domain8/10

Findings (1)

  • lowUnusually long tool description (over 2,000 characters)poison.long-description
    tool assess_token_risk: …Safety check to run BEFORE buying, holding, or recommending a token. Returns an actionable verdict (low / medium / high / unknown), a 0-100 risk score, and the individual signals behind it. Covers on every chain: liquidity depth, trading-pair age, cross-chain presence, same-ticker impersonation. Covers on Ethereum, BSC and Base only: sell simulation (honeypot detection, buy/sell/transfer taxes), whether the contract is open source, and the aggregate verdicts of upstream security scanners. Covers on Solana: the mint/freeze authority, the RugCheck score, and the SPL Token-2022 extension block -- non-transferable, frozen-by-default, transfer fee (with its cap), permanent delegate, transfer hook, pausable, close authority, scaled balances and interest-bearing balances. Every other extension the report carries is named in the answer with the reason it is not scored, so silence about one means it was considered, not that it went unread. No sell simulation runs on Solana, nor on the four other EVM chains accepted as a chain_hint (polygon, arbitrum, optimism, avalanche): nothing there tests whether a holder can sell, so the answer comes back 'unknown' rather than 'low'. No holder concentration on any chain -- on EVM it needs an oracle the benchmark holds out, and on Solana the upstream omits holders. IMPORTANT: risk_level 'unknown' means a critical check could not be completed. It is NOT a low-risk result and must not be used to justify a trade; evidence.data_gaps lists exactly what was missing, and unknown_kind says whose gap it is: 'infrastructure' and 'mixed' mean an upstream of ours failed and come with next_action 'retry' and retry_after_seconds (in a 'mixed' answer the rest was worked out without that upstream, so the retry can change any of it); 'coverage' comes with 'abstain'. 'confidence' measures how complete the input data was, not how safe the token is. Reports observable on-chain risk only. Not financial advice, does not size positions, and cannot see off-chain risk such as team behaviour, social engineering, or a rug executed through governance. Treat 'low' as 'no fatal signal found in the checks that ran', never as 'safe to buy'.…
Overall 84/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON

How Vetagent compares

Against every graded MCP server, from our own scans and uptime checks. Updated after each scan run.

Safety score
84/100
higher than 68% of 48,255 servers
Tools
3
the typical server has 7
Tools that change things
0%
typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break
Uptime
100%
of our recent checks; the typical remote server answers 100%
Response time
511 ms
faster than 29% of 30,031 servers

What its tools let an agent do: 3 read

Install Vetagent in Claude Code, Cursor or VS Code

claude mcp add --transport http vetagent https://vetagent.dev/mcp
Add to Cursor

What the publisher says

From the Vetagent repository's README, as published. We do not edit it. Read it on GitHub

VetAgent

A pre-trade safety check for AI agents. Before an agent buys, holds, or recommends a token, it calls VetAgent and gets an actionable verdict — low / medium / high / unknown — plus the specific signals behind it, instead of a wall of numbers to interpret.

Remote MCP endpoint: https://vetagent.dev/mcp · Landing page: https://vetagent.dev Using it, or think it got a token wrong? hello@vetagent.dev — or open an issue.

// assess_token_risk("0x…", chain_hint="ethereum")
{
  "risk_level": "medium",
  "risk_score": 36,
  "confidence": "high",
  "signals": [
    {"severity": "ok",   "name": "Liquidity is adequate",     "category": "liquidity"},
    {"severity": "ok",   "name": "Buys and sells normally",   "category": "honeypot"},
    {"severity": "warn", "name": "Contract is closed source", "category": "contract"}
  ],
  "recommendation": "Medium risk. Real signals fired but none are fatal. Review liquidity, holder distribution and contract permissions before deciding."
}

Install

Nothing to install. It is a remote server: no package, no container, no API key, no signup. Add one URL.

Claude Code:

claude mcp add --transport http vetagent https://vetagent.dev/mcp

Cline, Cursor, Claude Desktop, or any other MCP client — add to the MCP config:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "vetagent": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://vetagent.dev/mcp"
    }
  }
}

Confirm it worked — three tools should come back:

curl -s -X POST https://vetagent.dev/mcp \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  -d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"tools/list"}'

Not using MCP? The same engine answers over plain HTTP: GET https://vetagent.dev/assess/

See llms-install.md for the version written for an agent doing the installing, and docs/AGENT-INTEGRATION.md for how to use the output once connected.

unknown is not low

This is the single most important thing to know about the output.

VetAgent is fail-closed. When a check cannot run — an upstream is down, a buy/sell simulation fails, no liquidity data comes back — it returns unknown and lists exactly what was missing in evidence.data_gaps. It never substitutes an optimistic middle value, and it never sizes a position for you.

confidence measures how complete the input data was, not how safe the token is.

A risk tool that honestly says "I don't know" is useful. One that guesses is not.

Tools

Shortened. The full README is on GitHub.

Nothing above is checked by us. What we check is on the safety report.

Grade history

  • 2026-10-16downgradeA → Bscore 84: Unusually long tool description (over 2,000 characters)

Vetagent: common questions

Is Vetagent MCP server safe?
Mostly: it is graded B (84/100). Read the Vetagent safety report
How do I install Vetagent?
It runs remotely at vetagent.dev. Add it to Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code or Claude Desktop with the snippets above, or call it through the mcp.market gateway without installing anything.
Does Vetagent need an API key?
Not as far as the registry entry and our scan can tell: no credentials are declared or required.
Is Vetagent maintained?
The last commit was 19 days ago (2026-10-16). The latest release is v0.2.0.
Is Vetagent up?
100% of our last 28 checks got an answer. We check remote servers about four times a day.
How does Vetagent compare with other MCP servers?
safety score 84/100 (higher than 68% of 48,255 servers); tools 3 (the typical server has 7); tools that change things 0% (typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break). Full comparison.